Stating that the sky is blue and the grass is green is pretty meaningless if we can't agree on what blue, green, sky and grass are. Your definition of 'left' and 'right' are not those used by just about anybody else. For most Americans, republicans = right = conservatives, democrats = left = liberal. For Europeans, both of those are right while left = socialist. You can call that 'the flavor of language' all you want, but at the very least, maybe you should first explain to people what your flavor of choice is, i.e., your definitions of l left / right or conservative / liberal, because as far as I can tell, saying that left = individualist feelings and right = consequences is tautological with your lexicon.

I agree and I also agree with population reduction. What I do not agree with is extreme anti-humanism and letting go of caring for other people's lives just because of over population. Do not fool yourself into thinking I'm deluded or having an emotional response. Of course, it's emotional to think that girl should have been helped quickly and we all should feel this, but I'm not weeping or devoting my time to thinking about it: this was used purely as an example. I also know that a lot more children are dying this minute, and that I could be helping them. But I won't. I wrote some more stuff, but erased it, what's the point: My points have already been made in the topic and I think everyone can understand what I'm up against.

Then I'm confused as to what your point is. What do you mean by anti-humanism, if you have no problem with the acknowledgement that the whole is more important than the individual and population reduction is necessary towards this end? Is it that you disagree with not having an emotional response to seeing a little girl die? Emotions are emotions, they are not rational, we do not go about deciding how to feel about such a thing.

I would have helped because I dislike seeing children suffer without reason, and a single death solves nothing with regards to overpopulatin.

Only if you're trying to solve overpopulation with a single act, like IQ testing everyone and shooting all the under-120s.

As long as you don't convince anyone that this is an important topic, you could cancel all the hospitals in the world and it wouldn't make a dent. I understand that there will not be single act solution, but taking a bucket of seawater home next time you go to the beach really does not contribute in any way to preventing the sea level from rising.

You may be horrified by the callousness of chinese with regards to a child, but such an emotional response to an event, should never be what you base a worldview on.It is not a valid argument against the idea that the world is overpopulated and the need to drastically reduce the number of people living on it before the disastrous consequences are upon us.

If you want me to give you a reason why, despite overpopulation, this child should have been helped, you should re-read your nihilism: there is no absolute reason. Personally, I would have helped because I dislike seeing children suffer without reason, and a single death solves nothing with regards to overpopulatin.

Uh, have you actually listened to Advent Parallax? Most of the riffs are actually quite simple in a memorable, black metal sort of way. Most of the technicality just comes from strange and dissonant chord shapes. The song structures are pretty easy to follow as well, and manage to be different and unpredictable without being needlessly complex or difficult to keep up with. Great album.

I find this to be their worst album, oddly enough. The vocals sound like Satyricon, much more tame than the previous albums. I don't find any of their works memorable at all, I always lose interest quarter way through their songs. They have their moments though... I was just elaborating on their loose ends in my own opinion.

I think this stems from the fact that, while Averse's overall compostion and structure of songs are great, a great deal of the riffs that they use, while appropriate in context, are rather dull in and of themselves. Strange that you find Advent Parallax to be their worst though, as Tetragrammatical suffers from this a lot more.

Anyway, I think AnHero made a pretty good point. It's rather hard to point to bands that need reviewing if there is no clear objective as to whether the DLA should be historical, promote merely the best, point out examples of certain styles or what have you.

I was under the impression that the "liberals suck, yay conservatives" mentality here arose out of some sort of marketing idea: while a mere, as you put it, 0.00000001 per cent of conservatives may be on the right track, the percentage of liberals is a factor 10 smaller, so we should strive to connect with conservatives because there's a slightly bigger comonality.

Of course, the ridiculous hyperboles and plethora of strawmen with regards to liberalism are making it hard to consider criticism of it as more than parody or to consider the way it is used here as anything but a neologism for 'bad' ("Have you heard the new Immolation album? Yeah, but unfortunately it is totally liberal " ), and the conservatism promoted here has next t to nothing in common with what anybody outside of the fringe would associate with conservatism, although I do find it somewhat saddening that, in what I hope is merely an attempt to connect with mainstream politics, now and then there actually is a thread on how Bush wasn't that bad...

I think that's too loose of a definition as long as you don't explain what you mean by bad. Otherwise, I could find myself supporting that kind of liberalism, and I think most of the most stalwart antiliberals here could as well. I think any definition ought to stress the fact that liberalism considers freedom a virtue to strive for, with more freedom = better. I don't quite feel comfortable enough actually suggesting one though.

Trying to remain calm and on topic: I believe I do. You're 'active nihilism' is a particular world view about what is adaptive and how to go about getting it. Nihilism is a more general recognition that you're normative outlook is simply a projection of your evolutionary past, a product of anthropomorphism and not empiricism. We are free to choose what ever normative outlook we like after this realization. Intelligent people who have the brain power to see causes and their effects in the abstract, and thus big-picture stuff, will be more inclined to pick a value set which is *adaptive* because they can 'see into the future' in a matter of speaking compared to the non-abstract thinker.

However this is where it become subjective. Around what is adaptive, less so, but **what ways to go about working towards what is adaptive**.

but after that, I think you are looking too much at the 'impossibility' of the method. Right now, most everything here will be impossible to execute, simply because none of us are in a position of political power with broad support of the population. No, convincing people that your way is logically correct and theirs is not is obviously no small feat. However, saying that it is as impossible as having people grow wings is ridiculous. Look at the mass religious fanatics who are in power in places in the middle-east. Look at how in parts of India and China there is a 2:1 ratio of boys born due to selective abortion. Look at the mass support Hitler received in germany on his way to the top when preaching genocide, or even the support for Stalin and Mao even now. All of this proves that it most certainly is possible to get a population convinced that mass murder is a good thing. Besides, a far more important question than "how do we get this done?" is "is this desirable?". You should answer that question before complaining that the method sucks.

Thereís a decent amount of bands that Iím suggesting to cut here that Iíve never actually heard. However, considering how in the past 10 years I have never heard from a single person how any of those are noteworthy, I feel pretty comfortable suggesting their removal. There are also a number of bands that may have some historical purposes, but are terrible (Dark Funeral, Marduk, Arcturus, Abruptum). Maybe there could be a section of Evolutionary Dead-Ends or something. There are also a number of other bands which I think are bad, but which have vehement supporters, hence I think they should probably stay / be included (Conqueror / Black Witchery most notably).